2016 POTUS Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I believe Trumps position is that Mexico will pay for the wall. My guess is that he will assess traffic coming from Mexico and other trade tariffs as a way of financing the construction.
I don't think the economics are there for that. I don't think it's a stretch to estimate this wall will end up costing 60 to 100B dollars. Government contracts and difficult logistics tend to raise expenses exponentially. Even with our significant trade with Mexico, I think the percentages of tax necessary to finance would be too restrictive and discourage trade with Mexico. Especially if we're taxing just Mexico.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
All the people you have listed have trained themselves to public speaking. My comment still stands. New Yorkers by nature are aggressive speakers. Pointing out exceptions doesn't strengthen your argument.
Trained themselves?

Talk about making shit up, I know plenty of people from New York and they are not aggressive speakers.

Those are not exceptions they are random people from New York.
 

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
Trump changes tune on tax hikes for wealthy Americans and minimum wage

Trump changes tune on tax hikes for wealthy Americans and minimum wage

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said on Sunday he was open to raising taxes on the rich, backing off his prior proposal to reduce taxes on all Americans and breaking with one of his party's core policies dating back to the 1990s.

"I am willing to pay more, and you know what, the wealthy are willing to pay more," Trump told ABC's "This Week.":lol

After effectively sealing the Republican nomination for the Nov. 8 presidential election last week, Trump has used speeches and interviews to offer more details on his policy positions.

The billionaire real estate tycoon has said he would like to see an increase in the minimum wage, although he told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday he would prefer to see states take the lead on that front instead of the federal government.

"I don't know how people make it on $7.25 an hour," Trump said of the current federal minimum wage. "I would like to see an increase of some magnitude. But I'd rather leave it to the states. Let the states decide."

Trump's call for higher taxes on the wealthy is a break with Republican presidential nominees who have staunchly opposed tax hikes for almost three decades. Tax hikes have been anathema to many in the party since former President George H.W. Bush infuriated fellow Republicans by abandoning a pledge not to raise taxes and agreeing to an increase in a 1990 budget deal.

Democrats, including presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, have pressed for increased taxes on the wealthiest Americans for years.

Trump released a tax proposal last September that included broad tax breaks for businesses and households. He proposed reducing the highest income tax rate to 25 percent from the current 39.6 percent rate.

Pressed on the contradiction between his latest comments on taxes and the September tax plan, Trump said he viewed his original proposal as "a concept" and that he expected it would be changed following negotiations with Congress.

"By the time it gets negotiated, it's going to be a different plan," Trump told ABC. He emphasized in separate interviews with ABC and NBC that his priorities were lowering taxes on the middle class and businesses.

"The middle class has to be protected," Trump told NBC. The rich are "probably going to end up paying more," he said.

The Clinton campaign said Trump was trying to pander to voters beyond those who supported him in the Republican nominating contests and that he had no intention of raising the taxes of wealthy people.

"Don't believe Donald Trump's weak attempts at a general election 'makeover' for even a second," Christina Reynolds, a Clinton campaign spokeswoman, said in a statement. "Trump's economic plans take direct aim at working Americans - his proposal to cut trillions in taxes for the top one percent would almost certainly come at the expense of working- and middle-class families."

When asked on NBC whether he would release his own tax returns before the election, Trump said once again that it depended on the completion of an audit.

"Sure. If the auditors finish. I'll do it as fast as the auditors finish," he said.

DEEP DIVIDE

Republicans remain deeply divided over Trump's candidacy, although he has pledged to try to unite the party ahead of its convention in July. Prominent party leaders such as Paul Ryan, the top elected U.S. Republican, have distanced themselves from Trump over his proposal to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the United States.

Ryan, who has been a leading voice for the Republican Party on budget issues for years and is the House of Representatives speaker, has proposed a series of budgets that would cut taxes across the board.

Trump has also called for new tariffs on Chinese and Mexican imports to the United States, a position at odds with views on trade held by Ryan and many other pro-business Republicans.

Ryan, who will preside over the July 18-21 convention in Cleveland where the party will formally nominate its presidential candidate, said last week he hoped to eventually support Trump. But he added: "I'm just not there right now."

Republican U.S. Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona also is undecided about Trump. Flake said he wanted to see Trump revise some of his positions, including the proposed ban on Muslims entering the United States.

"He's got to soften his position there," Flake said.

Underscoring the party's divisions, Sarah Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate and a Trump supporter, criticized Ryan for failing to endorse Trump. The conservative populist firebrand said she would work to defeat Ryan in his Aug. 9 primary race against a conservative businessman.

Clinton said she hoped to take advantage of Republican reticence over Trump to draw the support of party defectors.

"I am asking people to come join this campaign," the former secretary of state told CBS. "And I've had a lot of outreach from Republicans in the last days who say that they are interested in talking about that."
_____________________________

So which democrat are you guys voting for? :rofl
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said on Sunday he was open to raising taxes on the rich, backing off his prior proposal to reduce taxes on all Americans and breaking with one of his party's core policies dating back to the 1990s.

"I am willing to pay more, and you know what, the wealthy are willing to pay more," Trump told ABC's "This Week.":lol

After effectively sealing the Republican nomination for the Nov. 8 presidential election last week, Trump has used speeches and interviews to offer more details on his policy positions.

The billionaire real estate tycoon has said he would like to see an increase in the minimum wage, although he told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday he would prefer to see states take the lead on that front instead of the federal government.

"I don't know how people make it on $7.25 an hour," Trump said of the current federal minimum wage. "I would like to see an increase of some magnitude. But I'd rather leave it to the states. Let the states decide."

Trump's call for higher taxes on the wealthy is a break with Republican presidential nominees who have staunchly opposed tax hikes for almost three decades. Tax hikes have been anathema to many in the party since former President George H.W. Bush infuriated fellow Republicans by abandoning a pledge not to raise taxes and agreeing to an increase in a 1990 budget deal.

Democrats, including presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton, have pressed for increased taxes on the wealthiest Americans for years.

Trump released a tax proposal last September that included broad tax breaks for businesses and households. He proposed reducing the highest income tax rate to 25 percent from the current 39.6 percent rate.

Pressed on the contradiction between his latest comments on taxes and the September tax plan, Trump said he viewed his original proposal as "a concept" and that he expected it would be changed following negotiations with Congress.

"By the time it gets negotiated, it's going to be a different plan," Trump told ABC. He emphasized in separate interviews with ABC and NBC that his priorities were lowering taxes on the middle class and businesses.

"The middle class has to be protected," Trump told NBC. The rich are "probably going to end up paying more," he said.

The Clinton campaign said Trump was trying to pander to voters beyond those who supported him in the Republican nominating contests and that he had no intention of raising the taxes of wealthy people.

"Don't believe Donald Trump's weak attempts at a general election 'makeover' for even a second," Christina Reynolds, a Clinton campaign spokeswoman, said in a statement. "Trump's economic plans take direct aim at working Americans - his proposal to cut trillions in taxes for the top one percent would almost certainly come at the expense of working- and middle-class families."

When asked on NBC whether he would release his own tax returns before the election, Trump said once again that it depended on the completion of an audit.

"Sure. If the auditors finish. I'll do it as fast as the auditors finish," he said.

DEEP DIVIDE

Republicans remain deeply divided over Trump's candidacy, although he has pledged to try to unite the party ahead of its convention in July. Prominent party leaders such as Paul Ryan, the top elected U.S. Republican, have distanced themselves from Trump over his proposal to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the United States.

Ryan, who has been a leading voice for the Republican Party on budget issues for years and is the House of Representatives speaker, has proposed a series of budgets that would cut taxes across the board.

Trump has also called for new tariffs on Chinese and Mexican imports to the United States, a position at odds with views on trade held by Ryan and many other pro-business Republicans.

Ryan, who will preside over the July 18-21 convention in Cleveland where the party will formally nominate its presidential candidate, said last week he hoped to eventually support Trump. But he added: "I'm just not there right now."

Republican U.S. Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona also is undecided about Trump. Flake said he wanted to see Trump revise some of his positions, including the proposed ban on Muslims entering the United States.

"He's got to soften his position there," Flake said.

Underscoring the party's divisions, Sarah Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential candidate and a Trump supporter, criticized Ryan for failing to endorse Trump. The conservative populist firebrand said she would work to defeat Ryan in his Aug. 9 primary race against a conservative businessman.

Clinton said she hoped to take advantage of Republican reticence over Trump to draw the support of party defectors.

"I am asking people to come join this campaign," the former secretary of state told CBS. "And I've had a lot of outreach from Republicans in the last days who say that they are interested in talking about that."
_____________________________

So which democrat are you guys voting for? :rofl
I have already said it won't be Hillary.
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
11,888
Let's say Trump wins and he tries to deport 11 million mexicans. How is he going to do that? lol, civil war will break out. How will he actually do that? If he does what will happen.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Let's say Trump wins and he tries to deport 11 million mexicans. How is he going to do that? lol, civil war will break out. How will he actually do that? If he does what will happen.
My biggest guess would be he'd ask for legislation, it'd get shut down, he'd try to get it done by executive order, he wouldn't. Trump would be going to Washington with all of congress unified against him. I think they'd be looking for the slightest excuse to impeach. So I'm guessing it gets dropped after that.

If he actually attempted to carry it out, it would be the single largest failure in this nation's history. There's no way federal law enforcement could corral a group of people the size of the population of Ohio out of the country. We'd have to deploy the military. Imagine Corporal Schmuckatelli trying to decipher documents from non English speakers, as we attempt to process a group of people that's larger than the prison population of the entire f***ing planet. Administration, security, holding facilities, I think the project would end up costlier than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and would likely end in an impeachment.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Let's say Trump wins and he tries to deport 11 million mexicans. How is he going to do that? lol, civil war will break out. How will he actually do that? If he does what will happen.
Trump will line up like everyone else if he is elected. All his rhetoric is just campaign fodder like hundreds before him.
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
11,888
Trump will line up like everyone else if he is elected. All his rhetoric is just campaign fodder like hundreds before him.

Exactly. All rebel stuff will get him in trouble or greatly lessen once he's in office. If he makes it that far.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Seriously though, I'd love to hear some opinions on building a wall and not building a wall.
Why approach border security in the dumbest most low tech way possible? You want a virtual wall made up of drones, cameras, increased National Guard patrols and presence, better intelligence on the other side of the border, demanding the Mexican government cooperate on cross border raids on Cartels, that all makes sense. Building a big ass wall that will already have tunnels under it along a border that is in large part a river is just intentionally stupid.
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
11,888
Why approach border security in the dumbest most low tech way possible? You want a virtual wall made up of drones, cameras, increased National Guard patrols and presence, better intelligence on the other side of the border, demanding the Mexican government cooperate on cross border raids on Cartels, that all makes sense. Building a big ass wall that will already have tunnels under it along a border that is in large part a river is just intentionally stupid.
I don't have a solid opinion on a wall but I can't imagine them being able to dig enough tunnels to offset the amount of miles of now fense at all by digging.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
I don't have a solid opinion on a wall but I can't imagine them being able to dig enough tunnels to offset the amount of miles of now fense at all by digging.
there are already awesome tunnels under that shitty fence. They have ventilation and everything.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
there are already awesome tunnels under that shitty fence. They have ventilation and everything.
I've never been there so I really have no idea what the border is like. Seems silly to have a border, say you're not allowed to cross it, and then have absolutely no physical barrier in place to stop someone from crossing it. But I'm guessing there is already a fence along the entire thing? Sure seems like we could easily have a technology that can determine if there is a tunnel at least somewhat near the surface.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
there are already awesome tunnels under that shitty fence. They have ventilation and everything.
If tunnels are known about and its presence well enough to describe how they are constructed why wouldn't it be a matter of blocking the other end?
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I've never been there so I really have no idea what the border is like. Seems silly to have a border, say you're not allowed to cross it, and then have absolutely no physical barrier in place to stop someone from crossing it. But I'm guessing there is already a fence along the entire thing? Sure seems like we could easily have a technology that can determine if there is a tunnel at least somewhat near the surface.
If tunnels are known about and its presence well enough to describe how they are constructed why wouldn't it be a matter of blocking the other end?
I think there's a failure to appreciate the shear scale of the border. We don't have a fence across the whole the, and the fence we've laid over a fraction of it has cost us nearly 3 Billion dollars. The US Mexican border is nearly 2000 miles long, with large, remote portions with no clear path for vehicles over large portions. You might as well be chasing down every ant hill on a ranch than find every tunnel across the border.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
I think there's a failure to appreciate the shear scale of the border. We don't have a fence across the whole the, and the fence we've laid over a fraction of it has cost us nearly 3 Billion dollars. The US Mexican border is nearly 2000 miles long, with large, remote portions with no clear path for vehicles over large portions. You might as well be chasing down every ant hill on a ranch than find every tunnel across the border.
You have to love how things cost the government probably way more then they should.

I think technology could be a big help in finding tunnels. I'm not an expert on ground penetrating radar but we are a pretty technologically advanced country. I struggle with the concept that we can't do something functionally to track tunnels under a fence. I think you either have to actually enforce the barrier or don't bother at all. Right now the system is kind of a joke.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
If tunnels are known about and its presence well enough to describe how they are constructed why wouldn't it be a matter of blocking the other end?
We've found plenty of the damned things, but by the time we plug one, they have dug six more. There's a lot of border and most of the stupid fence project has only served to cut US ranchers off from parts of their own land.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
You have to love how things cost the government probably way more then they should.

I think technology could be a big help in finding tunnels. I'm not an expert on ground penetrating radar but we are a pretty technologically advanced country. I struggle with the concept that we can't do something functionally to track tunnels under a fence. I think you either have to actually enforce the barrier or don't bother at all. Right now the system is kind of a joke.
that was my point, tech can enforce the border, an ancient Chinese method isn't going to do anything but cost money. Meanwhile, digging tunnels is too high tech for LT to understand. They didn't have shovels or mining back in his day.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,461
that was my point, tech can enforce the border, an ancient Chinese method isn't going to do anything but cost money. Meanwhile, digging tunnels is too high tech for LT to understand. They didn't have shovels or mining back in his day.
Yeah I don't pretend to have the answer. But I think throwing our hands up and saying, well there is 2000 miles we just can't do anything, is sort of pathetic as well. And if that is the answer, well then don't waste any money protecting the border at all because you're not stopping anyone. I know where I live ICE doesn't do anything with illegals. It's kind of a joke really.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom